RE: TTL Uses ???

"Steve Huston, COHESIONworX, 508-264-7117" <> Fri, 14 January 1994 18:21 UTC

Received: from by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10025; 14 Jan 94 13:21 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10020; 14 Jan 94 13:21 EST
Received: from by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15259; 14 Jan 94 13:21 EST
Received: by (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA28261; Fri, 14 Jan 1994 12:27:07 -0500
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <>
Received: from by (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA28246; Fri, 14 Jan 1994 12:27:05 -0500
Received: from by (5.65/13Jan94) id AA11994; Fri, 14 Jan 94 09:09:00 -0800
Received: by; id AA16971; Fri, 14 Jan 94 12:08:46 -0500
Message-Id: <>
Received: from cfsctc.enet; by us1rmc.enet; Fri, 14 Jan 94 12:08:47 EST
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 94 12:08:47 EST
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: "Steve Huston, COHESIONworX, 508-264-7117" <>
Subject: RE: TTL Uses ???

>I am still wondering also if TCP connects are only depending on the fact
>that ICMP time exceeded/datagram dropped or watching the TTL timer?

Neither.  TCP connection timers are handled in TCP, regardless of what's
happening in the layer beneath.  TCP can take advice from ICMP, etc. in
reporting to the user why the connection couldn't be made, but it doesn't
(or shouldn't) use that info to time out a connection, either while it's
being established or after that.

>In all this theory it just dawned on me to check how much pain re
>porting apps will be caused by this???

With the scope of changes coming with IPng, I think that apps such as
traceroute, etc. will be nearly insignificant noise.